[Punslayer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by djayjp /img/forum/go_quote.gif Regarding the GS1000 controversy-- At 60hz, it is 5db quieter than at 100hz, thus the heart of the bass (60hz) will be LESS THAN half as loud as the upper bass (100hz)-- pair this with a MASSIVE emphasis at the highend and you end up with crap bass imho.

John,

a drop of five decibals is not insignificant, but way more than half as loud. The frequency response graphs can be a useful tool, but they're way to simple to tell you much about how a headphone really sounds.

It's generally considered bad form around here to make athoritative statements about headphones you haven't heard, especially when you don't make it clear which headphones you have and haven't heard. I believe you have some experience with the HD555, ATH-M50 and possibly an SR80; correct?

 

[jellojoe]

Quote:

Originally Posted by djayjp /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...E.G., compare the sennheiser hd650 or 600 with the akg 701 as mentioned above (having little bass) and this matches perfectly with the charts (even though they are both reference phones and the differences are rather slight).

So with the exception of the bass, do you think the HD600 sounds like the K701?

 

[djayjp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jellojoe /img/forum/go_quote.gif So with the exception of the bass, do you think the HD600 sounds like the K701?

=573&graphID[]=63&graphID[]=73]http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCom...aphID[]=73

Nah, they're definitely a little different. Take a look at the angle (draw an imaginary line, or use paint) between the upper bass hump and the treble peak(s). Comparing the k702 to the hd600, you can see that the relationship between the bass and the treble is noticeably different, with the treble balance being more prominent in the k702; it also has a more extended, more emphasized upper high region vs. the hd600, contributing to that can's more laidback, less articulate feel (though with more bass).

 

[djayjp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punslayer /img/forum/go_quote.gif John, a drop of five decibals is not insignificant, but way more than half as loud. The frequency response graphs can be a useful tool, but they're way to simple to tell you much about how a headphone really sounds. It's generally considered bad form around here to make athoritative statements about headphones you haven't heard, especially when you don't make it clear which headphones you have and haven't heard. I believe you have some experience with the HD555, ATH-M50 and possibly an SR80; correct?

Are you getting me confused with someone else??? Anyhow, I am wrong, apparently, because a new source I found states that +10db is perceived to be twice as loud. My apologies. I can, however, easily tell a difference of 1-2db. I own super fi 5 pros and have auditioned the denon d2000, 5000, and the sennheiser hd650. I stand by my convictions regarding the graphs.

 

[White Mike]

I had to go for the HD-650s though I stil have a soft spot for the HD-25's...
Then again if it's full-range (full effect) bass I'm looking for, none of my headphones make the grade. Amp and speakers all the way!

 

[jellojoe]

Quote:

Originally Posted by djayjp /img/forum/go_quote.gif =573&graphID[]=63&graphID[]=73]http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCom...aphID[]=73 Nah, they're definitely a little different. Take a look at the angle (draw an imaginary line, or use paint) between the upper bass hump and the treble peak(s). Comparing the k702 to the hd600, you can see that the relationship between the bass and the treble is noticeably different, with the treble balance being more prominent in the k702; it also has a more extended, more emphasized upper high region vs. the hd600, contributing to that can's more laidback, less articulate feel (though with more bass).

A little different? By actual listening, they're completely different.

 

[djayjp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jellojoe /img/forum/go_quote.gif A little different? By actual listening, they're completely different.

Come on, now, don't pick and choose words

. You can see that I also said, "noticeably different". They are both reference phones, however (with a mostly flat response), so saying that they are "completely different" is quite unfair imo.

 

[jellojoe]

Quote:

Originally Posted by djayjp /img/forum/go_quote.gif Come on, now, don't pick and choose words . You can see that I also said, "noticeably different". They are both reference phones, however (with a mostly flat response), so saying that they are "completely different" is quite unfair imo.

By your own admission, you've never heard either the K701/K702 or the HD600. I don't think you're in any position to question anyone else's actual listening experience.

 

[djayjp]

I have heard the 650-- they're pretty close. Does the graph and my reading of it not fit with most people's characterizations of them? I think it indeed IS fair to say that they are more similar than different, especially compared to any other non-reference phone (where differences are HUGE).

On another note, I found a pretty good site with some frequency response graphs (unfortunately, many of the tests only go down to 100hz

):

Sennheiser HD 555 Headphones Review - Over-Ear - Reviews of Headphones and Headphone Ratings - HeadphoneInfo.com

=563]http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCom...phID[]=563

so what do ya naysayers think now? Even Ryu's graphs were pretty dang close...

 

[djayjp]

looking for more votes/feedback here!

 

[djayjp]

and which headphone will give me that deeeep, tight, controlled, ultra-low-end, subwoofer in the brain feel and without causing noticeable resonances (and without encroaching on upper bass-- ~100hz)?

 

[vvanrij]

You know you can put all your info in a single post djayjp, and if you want to change something, you can even edit it after you have posted it! And for all the freq graph lovers, if those thing would really give us all the info we needed, there wouldn't be any discussion on these forums, just think about it.

 

[djayjp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vvanrij /img/forum/go_quote.gif You know you can put all your info in a single post djayjp, and if you want to change something, you can even edit it after you have posted it! And for all the freq graph lovers, if those thing would really give us all the info we needed, there wouldn't be any discussion on these forums, just think about it.

Yeah, sorry about that

.

That's not true, actually-- because we all still have different degrees of hearing and tastes (like bassheads, etc., though I suspect most would like a flat response, or a slightly U-shaped response like I mentioned above). My argument that they still do tell you what you'll (potentially) hear still holds, I say!

 

[b0dhi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by djayjp /img/forum/go_quote.gif I do believe you are somewhat mistaken. I looked at Ryu's graph for the hd595 and compared to headroom's-- they are very similar, but different. I doubt that Ryu's equipment is as high end as headroom's (e.g., probably doesn't use a dummy head with a simulated human ear canal, etc.). Even if Headroom's graphs have changed substantially, it doesn't effectively matter, as one can still compare the relative differences between phones and compare their relative sound signatures. What I do is look at the bass peak and compare the angle between that and the treble peak-- you'd be surprised just how accurately this predicts a can's sound signature (this is rather over-simpified, however). E.G., compare the sennheiser hd650 or 600 with the akg 701 as mentioned above (having little bass) and this matches perfectly with the charts (even though they are both reference phones and the differences are rather slight).

You say it doesn't matter that the graphs are different because you're comparing between headphones within the same set of graphs. That's a valid point. You use the example of the HD650 being compared to the K701 and matching the widely held belief that they're significantly less bassy. Well, the previous set of graphs had the K701 with comparatively the same amount of bass (actually I think the K701 had slightly more) as the HD650. My point is that not only have the graphs changed, but the responses of headphones compared to one another within the same set of graphs has changed. The graphs should be used only as a guide, especially when you're judging headphones you haven't heard, as you have been doing in a couple recent threads.


Quote:

Originally Posted by djayjp /img/forum/go_quote.gif Come on, now, don't pick and choose words . You can see that I also said, "noticeably different". They are both reference phones, however (with a mostly flat response), so saying that they are "completely different" is quite unfair imo.

It seems unfair to you because you have not heard these headphones, and are comparing them by HR graphs alone. The 650 and K701 are completely different sounding headphones to many that have heard them, including myself.

I've also owned the GS1000 you're commenting on, and they certainly go much deeper than 100Hz. Also, they do not have too much treble (or bass), they are simply tuned for a significantly lower listening volume than most headphones (see Fletcher-Munson curves and the related ISO documents).

 

[Cool_Torpedo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by djayjp /img/forum/go_quote.gif and which headphone will give me that deeeep, tight, controlled, ultra-low-end, subwoofer in the brain feel and without causing noticeable resonances (and without encroaching on upper bass-- ~100hz)?

Probably DX-1000.